Participation Architecture MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 2 —
A Study of the The Seed Eco-Home Factor-e-Farm, Missouri Designed and Constructed by The Open Building Institute Open Source Ecology
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Table of Contents (CoT)
CITATION 44 Bibliography And References
— page 3 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Documentation 18 Floor Plans & Framing Perspectives 20 Elevations 22 Building Sections 24 Construction Detail Photos 26 Finished Building Photo 27 Module Connection Diagram
Analysis 30 Open Source Development 32 The Module 34 Ecosystem of Tools 38 User Participation 42 User Empowerment
MArch Arch 793
History 6 Seed Eco-Home 7 Open Building Institute (OBI) 12 OBI Principles 14 OSE - OBI Road Map 15 OBI Principles
MArch Arch 793
pa g e —
— 4
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
History
7
Open Building Institute (OBI)
12
OBI Principles
14
OSE - OBI Road Map
15
OBI Principles
— page 5 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Seed Eco-Home
MArch Arch 793
6
Seed Eco-Home The seed home is a solution for human’s need for shelter that is solved through Open Source contribution and Module construction. The resulting optimization of engineering, production, manufacturing, and construction enables a communal group of people the ability to erect an 800 square foot self-sustaining, off the grid, building in a matter of a week. The Open Building Institute uses the module and collective contribution to create an open source network that enables the individual to design and construct a structure to their needs at an optimized cost and time table.
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 6 —
A joint venture between the Open Building Institute and Open Source Ecology, the seed home is the core modular building of an expandable home. In a five-day workshop/build the OBI and 35 participants will demonstrate and test rapid building techniques and rollout the OBI toolkit of modules. The home will also be equipped with ecological features as the co-op has set a goal to be Living Building Challenge certified. On a larger scale, the OBI hopes to demonstrate and further document the feasibility of their modular building methodology using traditional building materials in most of the building. Previous builds relied heavily on the compact earth brick for its constructability and later its thermal properties; the Seed Eco-Home is comprised of mainly insulated stick built modular panels.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 10.1 Original Seed Eco-Home Sketch by Marcin Jakuboski (www.opensourceecology.com)
Open Building Institute (OBI)
— page 7 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Since 2013, OBI has been developing their means and methods through a series of build workshops. These “immersive learning” opportunities are five day hands-on builds that, are open to any interested participant. Each workshop has a detailed outline of takeaways, or learning objectives, to come away with as an attendee. In addition to the hands-on workshops are learning lectures that are worked into the week’s discussion sessions. The first workshop build was a 144 square foot prototype designed by Chris Reinhart called the Microhouse. The space included a small kitchen, bathroom, and a loft. The walls were primarily compressed earth brick pressed with Open Source Ecology’s CEB press. In April of 2014 another 144 square foo CEB Microhouse was constructed. The soil from excavation was used to produce the compressed earth bricks that formed the walls. A few months later a mud room was constructed between the prototype buildings. A covered porch was constructed on the south side then moved to accommodate a future greenhouse build. Another addition was constructed, in September of 2014 a 765 square foot, mainly CEB library, office, bathroom, and utility room addition. This iteration of construction included features that were the results of living in the
MArch Arch 793
Catarina moved from Brooklyn, New York to, as Marcin describes it, “the middle of nowhere, Missouri”, after they wed in 2013. Catarina’s need for a comfortable and affordable home drove the two of them to build their own home in the most efficient cost friendly way. Armed With high powered tools from Open Source Ecology, such as the highpower brick press, and extensive research, he developed a module system of assembled building parts. The idea being that each module could be constructed separately at the same time. This allowed him to efficiently delegate skilled and unskilled manpower to manufacture the different modules while other stages of the construction process were taking place with a diverse workforce, they would be able to build an 800 square foot structure from the ground up in just five days.
“Our combination of rapid build time, low cos
design, and feasibility of both social producti found in any other house offering“
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 8 —
previously constructed test houses, most of which dealt with thermal comfort. This build also took into consideration “hackability” or the ability to access and adapt the systems that are installed. In the fall of 2015 an 832 square foot aquaponic greenhouse with two inground fish ponds, a chicken coop connected to an outside run, rabbit pen, 44 6’-tall aquaponic towers, 216 feet of aquaponic troughs, two compost beds, and a potting and seed area were built in six days using the greenhouse modular wall system.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The modular approach in concert with traditional building practices and materials worked so well that they began to develop this system into an open source modular library that Marcin is calling the “OBI toolkit”. The digital toolkit is meant as an initial building block for contributors to expand on and add to. This open approach also allows the end-user to use, modify, distribute, or sell any part of the OBI system without penalty or royalties. In a TED talk Catarina uses Henry Ford’s desire for everyone to own a car as example of how important open production without royalty or penalty is to society and innovation. Once Ford, and anyone else could produce an automobile freely, car manufactures multiplied creating competition and innovation. Ford, for instance, in an effort to cut the selling price needed to produce a greater daily volume of car, which gave birth the assembly line and 8-hour work days. In this sense the library is operated under a share-alike license, which requires reciprocation of your designs or improvements back into the common pool. Similar to the OSE’s GVCS database, The OBI library includes video and diagrammatic documentation as well as design guidelines that help with understanding the restraints on layout configuration in addition to assemblage requirements and construction procedures. The improvement of this information over time is subsequently through communal input, in place of centralised closed loop development,
st, regenerative features, user-generated
ion or commercial build models are not - Marcin Jakuboski
MArch Arch 793
this is necessary to improve on and diversify the building system for adaptation into the conditional environment and real life building constraints. The Modular system is not only diverse in that it can be customised and combined with other modules to form a complex system, but the homogeny of its construction simplifies the engineering of the building on a cellular level, reproduced, and implemented throughout the building. This simplicity extends into the adaptation of the system to challenges that exist outside of the Factor E Farm. “Our combination of rapid build time, low cost, regenerative features, user-generated design, and feasibility of both social production or commercial build models are not found in any other house offering“ (Johnson).
— page 9 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 10.2 MicroHouse 3D Section Perspective 3D Sketchup File (www.opensourceecology.com)
Open Source Ecology (OSE) Marcin established Open Source Ecology (OSE) which at its roots is an “open source, collaborative network of farmers, engineers and other supporters setting out to assemble a set of modular, DIY, lowcost, high-performance platform that allows for fabrication of 50 different industrial machines” (opensourceecology.org/archive/). These machines make up the Global Village Construction Set (GVCS). The key to developing the GVCS is the concept of Open Source contribution and Modular construction.
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 10 —
The Module allows for the breaking down of a system into parts; these parts can be efficiently allocated to allow for parallel design, production and construction within the same system, a number of different systems, or systems of entirely different machines. OSE describes open source as “the model of providing goods and services which includes the possibility of the end-user’s participation in the production of these goods and services.” The OSE cites Linux computer operating system as the model that best demonstrates how open source development can be utilized to create an inexpensive advanced system without cooperate intervention. One of the early contributors to the OSE was Mark Shuttleworth the creator of Ubuntu Linux OS.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 10.3 LifeTrac Open Source Ecology Global Village Construction Set
Global Village Construction Set (GVCS)
MArch Arch 793 — page 11 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 10.4 Earth Brick Compactor (www.opensourceecology.com)
OBI Principles Marcin Jakuboski - Open Source Ecology
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 12 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Marcin has a BS in chemistry from Princeton University and a PH.D. in Physics: Fusion Energy from the University of Wisconsin. His education is extensive in the science of everything calculable, which on the surface makes his simple means of living as a farmer surprising. However, the Factor E Farm (FeF) does not run as a traditional farm; the 30-acre parcel 1 hour from the Kansas City International airport in Missouri is a proving ground for a diverse assortment of projects based on open source, libre processes and hardware development. The name Factor E Farm describes what Marcin intends to create with the ‘E’ being Euler’s number, a transcendental number – implying the disruptive nature that he hopes the work accomplished on the farm will bring. This is opposed to a factory farm with production based on centralized commercial and industrial norms that feed into and rely on a system based on commerce and control of materials. The farm allows for Marcin along with any willing participant, regardless of experience or education, to immerse themselves in the development of open source hardware with a goal of creating an open source economy. The farm was originally purchased in 2004 for Marcin to expand his organization Open Source Ecology, and it’s goal of developing an open source set of DIY plans for 50 machines essential to building a civilization.
Catarina Mota - Open Building Institute
MArch Arch 793 — page 13 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
As an open source advocate, Catarina has head up several organizations that facilitate open source contribution. She studied interactive telecommunications at NYU and has a Ph.D. in Communication Sciences: Contemporary Culture and New Technologies from New University of Lisbon in Portugal. She co-founded OpenMaterials, a research group that promotes open source methods for DIY production methods and use of materials. At the heart of the groups contributors are people experimenting with the makeup and use of materials and posting the documentation of their findings so that others can add to and experiment openly with the published results. She also founded Everywhere Tech which is described as, “a coalition of individuals and organizations intent on bringing open source solutions to those who need them the most. Our mission is to facilitate open source technology transfer to help create resilient communities around the world. We do this by connecting universal open source hardware solutions with real-world needs.” (everywheretech.org/about/) The platform’s focus on creating resilient communities is based on providing open source knowledge and documentation to impoverished or disaster stricken areas, In place of fully assembled devices/goods. The idea being that having knowledge of how the pieces and parts assemble and work together allow the community to continually thrive and build upon their knowledge. The learning process helps circumvent using the hardware in a way that may not be to its fullest potential and when the hardware breaks down it becomes useless to the community. To do this Everywhere Tech is trying to establish a protocol for open source technology transfer. The solution and relevance of their mission is one that Catarina and Marcin implement and test at the Open Building Institute.
OSE - OBI Road Map Open Source Ecology + Open Building Institute History
Future
MicroHouse Seed Build 2013 MArch Arch 793
Open Building Institute Established
— pa g e 14 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Birth of Open Source Ecology (OSE) 2003
Settlement of OSE Maysville, Missouri on 30 acre Farm 2006 Global Village Construction Set 2008
Marcin & Catarina Marrage 2013
Compacted Brick Press 1 Day Build 2012
Marcin Gives GVCS TED Talk 2011
MH Build 4 2015 MH Build 3 Fa. 2014
Seed Eco-Home Build 11-2016 Seed Funding Kickstarter 06-2016
Seed Home Full Product Release & Collaboration Platform Launch 7-2018
MH Build 2 Sp. 2014
Advanced Starter Home Builds 11-2017
MArch Arch 793
Training Program Launch 2-2017
—
Sp. 2017 OSE + OBI Joint Venture Announced 06-2016
Materials Production Facility Launch 11-2017
CNC Torch Table Civilization Build Starter Kit Launch 12-2016 8-2018
15 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Lumber & Stabilized Brick Production
page
MArch Arch 793
pa g e —
16
—
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
22
Building Sections
24
Construction Detail Photos
26
Finished Building Photo
27
Module Connection Diagram
— page 17 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Documentation
20 Elevations
MArch Arch 793
18 Floor Plans & Framing Perspectives
Floor Plans & Framing Perspectives
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.1a Attic Floor Plan
— pa g e 18 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016 Fig. 11.2a Typical Wall, Floor, Roof Module Framing diagram.
Loft Attic
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.1b Main Floor Plan
— page 19 —
Dining room
Bathroom
Kitchen
Utility Room
Fig. 11.2b Framing perspective
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Family Room
Elevations
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.3a Short Side Elevation
— pa g e 20 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
12.21
Fig. 11.4 Longitudinal Elevation
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.3b Short Side Framing Elevation
— page 21 — Fig. 12.5a Longitudinal Section Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Building Sections
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.5 Longitudinal Section
— pa g e 22 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016 Fig. 11.6a Module Sheathing Layout Diagram
MArch Arch 793
page
—
23 —
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 11.6b Framing Diagram
Construction Detail Photos
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 24
Fig. 11.7 Seed Bio-Home workshop/build. Module Foundation Form work
— Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016 Fig. 11.9 Seed Bio-Home workshop/build. Prefabrication of wall Modules.
MArch Arch 793 — Fig. 11.8aThe closed edge of the wall module is placed proud of the butt end of the sill plate. The next module’s sill plate will be inserted in the notch that is created. The notch acts as a locking mechenism between panels.
Fig. 11.8b Seed Bio-Home workshop/build. Site fabricated wall modules installed on concrete foundation stem wall. (openbuildinginstitute.org/)
page 25 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 11.10 Seed Bio-Home workshop/build. The closed edge of the wall module photo. (openbuildinginstitute.org/)
Finished Building Photo
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 11.11 Seed Bio-Home Building Section Perspective
— pa g e 26 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016 Fig. 11.12 Completed Seed Bio-Home Photograph (openbuildinginstitute.org/)
Module Connection Diagram
MArch Arch 793 — page 27 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 11.13 Typical Wall - Module Connection Diagram
MArch Arch 793
pa g e —
28
—
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Analysis
32
The Module
34
Ecosystem of Tools
38
User Participation
42
User Empowerment
— page 29 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Open Source Development
MArch Arch 793
30
Open Source Development
MArch Arch 793
As OSE defines it, open source allows the end-user to contribute to the production of goods and services. In terms of Architecture, communal contribution can happen on many levels. Their contributions are woven into the complexities of the construction process and can begin to optimize the delivery and quality of what is constructed. The information provided from peer to peer sharing can cut the cost in parallel with optimization of the process. This is demonstrated in technology through open source software that is offered to the public with a free license of use.
— pa g e 30 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
open source allows the end-user to contribute to the production of goods and services. The open source license allows for not only the public to benefit but also the development of the software benefits by expanding the number and variety of end-user that may participate in the software’s production. The expansion of the end user adds both relevant and irrelevant contribution to evolutionary growth. As with biological evolution keeping relevant advances optimizes functionality. Architecture, specifically Modern Architecture, has strived to optimize the process of creating space and the ability to reproduce these spaces in the most efficient way. Modernist architecture failed to allow perspective or input and optimized the production through economics. The inability to naturally optimize through selection of solutions resulted in less options and minimalist spaces.
— page 31 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
An open source project, in any industry, must deal with two challenges: licensing and sifting through submitted contributions. In all industries it is standard procedure to protect intellectual property; in the end, an idea is what makes money. The simplest to the most complex problems need solutions and the solutions are what differentiate one product from another. The results can mean an economy of difference. In architecture, the genius of a design and its documentation is protected though copyrights or secrecy. However, in recent years some top architects such as Pritzker Prize winner Alejandro Aravena and the architects involved with paper, an organization that works with top architects to make the plans of select designs public, have made it a point to make the documentation of their designs available for use under an open source license.
MArch Arch 793
Sharing openly does not stop with the contribution of ideas; the access to data on a communal level also contributes to how architecture is realized. Studies of human habits and interaction, ecology, and environment can be propagated to allow for a better understanding of how architecture affects the environment it is directly and indirectly creating. The use of weather data, for example, can allow facades to optimize shading devices in different conditions without user intervention. The ability to integrate openly shared data into design computation as rules within algorithms advances the way contemporary architecture is generated and shaped.
The Module
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 32 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The Module in design is a common tool. Components with varying properties but similarity in application help in creating a multitude of possibilities and combinations. An assortment of modules such as bricks come together in uniform or varying patterns to create a wall. With proper placement, the brick wall can maintain structural integrity while supporting an opening; all created with the same module of brick. This principle is used by the OSE to create components for their machines that are easily reproduced and used across several different machines or have a modular connection that can accommodate a variety of plug-in components. The wall is much different in dynamics to a compacted earth brick press assembly, but they can both be analysed and broken down into more manageable, interchangeable parts. The wall uses bricks and boards and the brick press used steel tubes and plates. The efficiencies in production are proven by the OSE’s brick press workshop where a layman group of participants with varying experience levels and backgrounds can complete the fabrication and build in 12 hours. The ability to complete such a complex machine in a short period relies on a parallel construction process producing individual parts that assemble into the brick press. In architecture, a module can be seen in dimensions, materials, even details. This form of optimization not only helps with the construction and manufacturing process but also bring rhythm to a space or create an aesthetic atmosphere.
Fig. 12.1a Octahedron Module systematic assemblage schematic diagram
MArch Arch 793 — page 33 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 12.1b Rectilinear Building Module Diagram
Ecosystem of Tools
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 34 —
The Eco-Home’s development exists completely in an open source ecosystem; from open source hardware developed by OSE to the software adopted by OBI to create and utilize their 3D model library. The entire process is made transparent using Google Drive which houses a living folder that contains documentation of structural communications, scheduling, iterations of modules, pricing breakdowns, etc. The folder containing the OBI toolkit library is linked through the OBI website. The entire drive can be downloaded and connected to a personal drive. With no true standard workflow or database to house an open hardware project, like Github a repository for open source software that helps administer the workflow of open source development. WikiHouse has decided to utilize the GitHub platform after piecing the process together through several different services; this is not the norm for most open source hardware projects.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The OBI toolkit is a five-folder database containing furniture blocks, procedures with installation documentation, structural modules, parts, and structures. The structures folder has building models completely laid out for reference. The structural module folder contains the wall and roof module blocks. The parts folder contains the individual elements that make up the module assemblies, i.e. 2x studs, and used in situations that cannot be solved by the module like finish trim. The structural module is the driving force of OBI’s design-build strategy, only 20 variations are included in the current state of the library. Whether intentional or not, the limiting factor of choices begins to form a frame work that helps to not overwhelm user-designers in laying out their module system. The wall modules are constructed using dimensional 2x lumber framing that range in length from 4’ to 1’, at any dimensional stud depth, and sheathed or infilled with different panels of material. The
module’s height is normally no greater than eight feet since most material sheets such as plywood are manufactured in 4’ x 8’ panels. The dimensional lumber is currently a local source (purchased from local supplier) but Marcin has been able to prototype a wood planer through the Open Source Ecology’s Global Village Construction Set. This planer has not been implemented in the process, however one of the underlying goals of these projects is to become autonomous in both construction of the home and its lifecycle. This would mean complete control over manufacturing and materials.
— page 35 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The module is not only a tool for more efficient construction and teaching but it also makes the design and layout of a constructible home a manageable endeavour for the user to be involved with. The 3D library’s structural modules within Sweet Home 3D allow the user to layout their home with easily interchangeable parts. The main software Sweet Home 3D, adopted by OBI, is an open source interior design application. This was chosen based on its stability and ease of use. The modules have been created in the “.sw3d” file format, however the library also contains “.obj” files that most CAD programs are able to import. The import process is quick but the resulting geometry is exploded into individual meshes. The exploded components are unusable unless the designer’s intent is to keep the module as is and its parts in a group or block. They are currently trying to create a more streamlined object library using FreeCAD as the program of choice. SH3D treats the modules as furniture pieces rather than framed walls, floors, or roof systems that interact with one another. This type of user interface, while not ideal in terms of design software, can be less intimidating than full on CAD software. The walls become more like Legos clicking together to enclose volumes and create spaces. The quad viewport layout, plan view on top, rendered 3D perspective view below, library file structure on the side with a list of components in the layout below, allow for instant feedback
MArch Arch 793
The roof modules for the Seed Eco-Home are constructed using 2x12 lumber framing rafters. The roof and floor systems are similar in construction and regulate the width of the short side of a house layout at 16 foot. The roof modules within the 3D library differ from what was constructed on site, however the green house implemented glazed and vented modules are similar to the ones found in the 3D library. The roof module, like the walls, are flexible in their construction to accommodate regional conditions and codes by their ability to stack or by modifying the member depth for added strength.
Fig. 12.2 Sweet Home 3D user interface
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 36 —
without a ton of effort. The ability to dissect the module construction is still available as each piece can be pulled apart when you open the module file separately. There is also a layered index of objects that are within the layout, simplifying several project management processes that will occur at all stages of construction. Standard windows, doors, and plumbing fixtures are also available creating an additional layer of module creation or customization outside of the already configured structural modules available in the library.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The completed building layout still requires evaluation for its constructability and, if necessary, certification by an engineer or architect for permitting prior to construction. In the case of the Seed Eco-Home, the OBI worked with, and is in continual demand of, structural engineers that will volunteer their services and publish their calculations with an open source license. This system of construction, although it uses standard industry material and practices, is still in its infancy both in implementation and industry awareness. The Factor-E-Farm provides a safe haven for construction that may not comply with the IBC due to Missouri’s lax building codes and its secluded location. The open source community is not fully controlled but is capable of being highly innovative because of the diversity of contribution from people with diverse backgrounds. The ethos of the Open Building Institute is not reliant on centralized development, rather it distributes the load to contributors that want to advance OBI’s mission. Contributions from engineers help evolve the systems constructability as well as the technology that OBI plans to implement in order to stay off the grid and be eco-friendly. The documentation of each element is an important process to be considered, as contributions are not from the same contributor every time. The vetting of information and its provider is another challenge
— page 37 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The construction process and prototyping of the modules are carried out as workshops. These workshops are composed of instructors who are usually one of the design or engineer advisors and students. The students pay a fee to participate in the construction process. The instructors help coordinate the builds and give lectures on key ideas that will help students understand how to implement core principles after leaving the workshop. The education element is an attempt to give participants the tools economically capitalize on what OBI is creating. The workshops have been a staple in the OSE hardware development. Their contributions to OBI’s building workshops have also been a proving ground for many of the industrial machines OSE has in development. The CEB press is key in providing bricks for flooring and wall construction. The trench digging machine, backhoe, and mini dozer are also part of the Eco-Home building process.
MArch Arch 793
within open source hardware model of development. OBI currently has a team of advisors that are used regularly for both vetting and contributing on a range of issues from scaling business to construction. Continual promotion to raise awareness of the project, through TED talks and college tours, helps grow the community around the project creating a pool of knowledgeable to help with validation. They also utilize the power of social media to trouble shoot issues as the prototyping is in process. By posting problems on various forums and social outlets they can get quick responses while also allowing work to continue in other area of the build.
MArch Arch 793
pa g e —
38
—
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 12.4 3D Wall Components
MArch Arch 793
Fig. 12.5 3D Roof Components
— page 39 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 12.6 Axonometric Rendering of OBI Seed Building. Model and rendering in Sweet Home 3D. An open source interior design oriented software that OBI has chosen to be the primary program to work with the library toolkit. They also provide OBJ. files for use with other open source or proprietary 3D programs.
User Participation
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 40 —
The morphology of the world is soon to, if not already, come to an impasse with the advancement of technology, the power it has to organize the masses at any moment for any reason, creating unforeseen disruption. The economy sees the benefits of technology; however, society on a global level, has the ability to shift the economic benefits without warning. Communities that are worlds apart and speak different languages become neighbours over a dialog about common interest. The elimination of boundaries by opening avenues of communication across these gaps of geography and culture have created a new moment in society. A moment where the power of the unauthored communal creates with anonymity.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The connected world has a broad network of resources that allow for communal development, production, and distribution. The concept of an open loop development over a centralized closed loop creates the opportunity for an intervention to happen at any number of levels from any type of contributor. Solutions are generated by both methods of development; however, an open loop democratic approach allows for continual innovation that builds on the previous contribution or in parallel with other proposed iterations creating the opportunity for exponential advancement in an instant. The continual loop feedback and development acts as a way of testing solution fitness. Borrowing from developmental biology theory, the fitness of an iterative solution is not based on constant terms, rather the solution’s emergence is based on variable adaptation to conditions in their environment and vice versa. The resulting environmental adaptations are reintroduced into the equation which evolves the lineage of solutions introduced to the environment. Open sourcing hardware provides access to a wide range of continually changing environments to test and gain informative advancements .
— page 41 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Architecture as a practice has operated in a closed loop development process that allows the end-user, if they are the client, to participate in the process. Participation in the process of architectural design affords vested parties the ability to give an opinion, but at no point does the architect give final say to the end-user. John Habraken, a member of the CIB Open Building Working group, is opposed to even using the word participation as he feels the “rhetoric of participation - is ultimately an attempt for professional architects to retain control”
MArch Arch 793
The end-user’s perspective can be provided from diverse backgrounds, conditions, and experiences bringing unexpected incite while raising unrealized questions. The contributor, as a user brings, a unique adjacency that positions them outside of the factory of development. Since their main objective is to be a user, this outside looking in evaluation is not an option if the development process is closed to the user. The outsider’s position is one of indirect authority in development as the feedback and contribution they provide are reactive and without bias to the process. Their solutions or hacks to the system at large may not be the outright answer but the purity of reasoning becomes a building block for constructing an answer that fits within the process. The diversity and quantity of information that the user can provide regarding what real world issues occur is unmatched when dealing with systematic debugging. An example of the end user’s voice being heard because of the open connectivity of social media was the ultimate demise of Peter and Alison Smithson’s Robin Hood Gardens. For years tenants complained, campaigned, and demonstrated for the ill constructed communal housing to be demolished. But not until after the outcry reached beyond the local air gap and connecting to a broader audience through social media did the demolition take place. What their efforts demonstrated is a clear advancement in technology and how it directly empowers the enduser and society.
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 42 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
(Ratti and Claudei) . Habraken’s option is harsh and not necessarily fare to the profession. There have been architects in the past that have in some way involved input from the end user and all have failed. Systematized collaboration in the 1970’s attempted to utilize the power of computation to process data generated by the “systems thinking” paradigm, which was a data collection system developed after WWII that could be applied to any disciplinary challenge. The information output from the computation was so complicated that the architect barely understood the results and the process was eventually abandon. Christopher Alexander’s Oregon Experiment was an analog approach where he attempted to engage the student body and implement their input into the campus master plan. Alexander even developed an entire “pattern language” that acted as a framework to simplify the decisions while still allowing the freedom of choice. His apathy towards the layman did not anticipate their lack of interest in participating in the planning process and could not get enough students to partake. These examples holistically demonstrate both the digital attempt to passively incorporate the end-users input and the analogue attempt to directly involve the end-user’s decisions to shape the architecture.
The “rhetoric of participation - is ultimately an attempt for professional architects to retain control ”
Fig. 12.5 View from above of digital table showing plan, information display, tagged physical components, and continuously updated feedback about design (Kent Larson, Open Source Building Reinventing Places of Living)
— page 43 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
20 years ago A Group from MIT, the Open Source Building Alliance explored the possibility of imbedding intelligence into a user based design environment. The scenarios they explored may be viable with the technology of to day.
MArch Arch 793
Despite his bias, Habraken’s response to eliminating the need for professional intervention in multifamily housing, by proposes a bottom up design that grows to inhabit and change the cells of a larger framework. The “natural relation” theory based multifamily housing in a structural-infill system. Housing modules are inserted into a constructed framework rather than the floor plan being integrate into the building system. Flexibility to the resident and the commercial developer is afforded as the living environment can be self-tailored while maintaining a standardized rapidly reproduced modular frame. The complex nature of effectively empowering the end user to control the design of their own environment is simplified by specifying only the frame work for the parties to engage with the architect. This way the architect is not giving influence over the user’s actual needs.
User Empowerment
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 44 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
The OBI’s Seed Eco-Home is a demonstration of how the OBI toolkit can be deployed and retrofitted to be environmentally regenerative. In his book Modulor 2, Le Corbusier acknowledged, “modulated prefabrication will put the house within everyone’s reach and will lead to an architecture which, though extending on the universal plane, will retain the clearly defined characteristics of every individual and every region.” Corbusier is addressing a module of volume that can be rapidly adapted and reproduced by prefabricated elements. OBI’s goal expands on Corbusier’s proclamation by also empowering everyone to design the house that is in their reach. The Eco-Home fails to become a universal building system that empowers the user to design and build because it fails to reconcile the complexity encoded within the design decisions of architecture through its digital library of modules. The module library is similar to an architectural office’s library of details that are reused over multiple projects. The evolution of these parts over time can come to define the architectural vocabulary that an office is known for. The emergence of preference is shaped by many factors both design related and from environmental influence. These influences include local construction practices and contractors, regional regulation, reliable and available products provided by manufacturers, etc. The parti of a design may change but its development is carried out by utilizing a kit of parts that harmoniously interface with one another. The toolkit’s module library provides a similar kit to the user; however, the OBI library’s components are being tested in a controlled environment. The Factor E Farm’s environment is a vacuum where a more controlled evolution can take place. The challenges occur once the modules are implemented outside of the vacuum. These challenges are primarily due to unconsidered variable conditions that have not influenced previous iterations throughout the lineage of development. Every open source hardware that is reproduced outside of its original habitat would seemingly have this issue.
— page 45 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
As we have seen in the Oregon University project, the user’s capacity for design is not deep enough to simply footnote The data to each variation of module and expect them to follow through designing a home that fits their needs. The complexity of what the module’s role is within the system beyond having a window, door or solid surface distracts from its capability to simplify the process and empower the user.
MArch Arch 793
The ironing out of conflicts that occur will ideally happen through the reciprocity within the open source community that begins to affect the lineage of evolution. The first generational environment may be different from the next generations and so on; the results are fed back into as variable to be considered. Beyond this process architect or engineer’s intervention will, for the most, be required to validate the plans and integrity of their module home design. The Open Building Institute hopes to eliminate the need for intervention by working with engineers to produce calculations for the structural integrity of the modules themselves. The validation of the module’s integrity is crucial in allowing the user to not only build but also design without professional intervention. The restraints that will inevitably be imposed on the modules need to be encoded into the digital tools that become building blocks for design decisions. The effectiveness a library of parts that depends on whether the designer is able create a layout with ignorance to the constructability of their choices, while maintaining the integrity of the resulting structure and its constructability.
MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 46 —
A parametric model of the OBI modules system would allow the user to visualize their design decisions on a modular level and the environment they are creating. An example of application would be coding the environmental conditions into the model, which would inform the user when a design move effects the heat gain or natural light penetration. Informing the user or restricting their moves so that a range of criteria is met enriches the OBI library by codifying architectural complexities into the system to inform the modules that shaping the system. The emergence of the user-designer-builder through the possibility of technology and simple building systems can empower the laymen without a professional architect’s intervention.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
On an individual or rural community level the OBI system is a relevant option; however, the ability to scale this into a viable solution for overpopulation or poverty stricken areas as housing is not promising. The system needs to be accommodating as a multifamily structure. The current model can be engineered and configured as a multifamily housing unit or any other building typology that may be desired. The OBI system, as a whole, is geared to the user as the one designing, building, living, and expanding their dwelling. On a farm with 30 acres of space for multiple sprawling houses it is feasible because no one has to compromise with each other. The limiting factor is when a dwelling is stacked on top of another, which is necessary to be considered when searching for a solvent option for major world issues. The OBI system does not come with instructions on navigating a sleeping quarter expansion that extends to your neighbours building. A developer of land could utilize the system but what happens to the user-designer at that point when an architect is reintroduced to the mix and the user most likely has no input on the space they will eventually occupy and live in. The wiki house for that matter would have the same issue as well. The answer may lie closer to Habraken’s infill system or a combination of the two concepts.
MArch Arch 793
I do see, viability in a system that allows a community of lower middle class families such as Detroit, where there are plenty of working blue collar families that need an option for better housing. The government controlled utilities are a concern that the OBI Eco-Home would be able to circumvent with the ability to produce its own resources. There are plenty of single family lots that are un-usable because of pour structural condition of the houses that occupy them. The ability to start fresh is ideal but the traditional construction costs would be out of reach for most people in the city. The OBI system would not only put costs into reach but it allows the user to tailor their built environment, which is usually only afforded to the 1%.
— page 47 — Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Fig. 12.6 Osaka Gas next 21 (http://faculty.virginia.edu/GrowUrbanHabitats/\ images/next_21/next_21/Change_Harding.jpg)
Bibliography Bryant, Levi R. The Democracy of Objects. Ann Arbor: Mpublishing, 2001. Cameron Colby Thomson, Marcin Jakubowski. “Toward an Open Source Civilization.” Innovations (2012): 53-69. Cole, Raymond J. “Transitioning from green to regenerative design.” Building Research & Information, 2012: 39-53. everywheretech.org/about/. n.d. Web Site. 04 12 2016. Habraken, N. J. N. J. Habraken Explains The Potential Of The Denise Morado Nascimento. 2012. Habraken, N. John. TOOLS OF THE TRADE. 1996. MArch Arch 793 — pa g e 48 —
“how-it-works.” n.d. openbuildinginstitute.org/how-it-works/. 25 10 2016. Jakubowski, Marcin. Introduction to Open Building Institute Cat Johnson. 2013. Johnson, Cat. Introducing the Open Building Institute: A Q&A with Macin Jakubowski. 13 July 2016. Document. Kent Larson, Stephen Intille, T.J. McLeish, Jennifer Beaudin, and R.E. Williams. “Open Source Building: Reinventing Places of Living.” Scientific. 2004. Document.
Un i ve rsi ty o f Sou th e rn Cal i for ni a 2016
Mollie Claypool, Manuel Jimenez Garcia, Gilles Retsin. “The Laboratory of Mereology.” unit 19 (2015). open-building.org/. n.d. 07 12 2016. openbuildinginstitute.org/. n.d. 09 12 2016. Open-sourced blueprints for civilization. Perf. Marcin Jakubowski. 2011. Video Stream. opensourceecology.org/about-overview/. n.d. Web Site. 16 November 2016. opensourceecology.org/archive/. n.d. Website. 20 November 2016. Ratti, Carlo and Matthew Claudei. Open Source Architecture. London: Thames & Hudson LTD, 2015. Book. Sanchez, Jose. “POST-CAPITALIST DESIGN: Design in the Age of Access.” Paradigms Of Computing, ACADIA 2014. 2014. TEDxO’Porto 2013. Perf. Catarina Mota. 2013. Video Stream.